Department of Psychology - University of Milano-Bicocca, Italy.
Department of Psychology - University of Milano-Bicocca, Italy.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2022 Sep;229:103681. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103681. Epub 2022 Jul 18.
The spread of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in ever-widening domains (e.g., virtual assistants) increases the chances of daily interactions between humans and AI. But can non-human agents influence human beings and perhaps even surpass the power of the influence of another human being? This research investigated whether people faced with different tasks (objective vs. subjective) could be more influenced by the information provided by another human being or an AI. We expected greater AI (vs. other humans) influence in objective tasks (i.e., based on a count and only one possible correct answer). By contrast, we expected greater human (vs. AI) influence in subjective tasks (based on attributing meaning to evocative images). In Study 1, participants (N = 156) completed a series of trials of an objective task to provide numerical estimates of the number of white dots pictured on black backgrounds. Results showed that participants conformed more with the AI's responses than the human ones. In Study 2, participants (N = 102) in a series of subjective tasks observed evocative images associated with two concepts ostensibly provided, again, by an AI or a human. Then, they rated how each concept described the images appropriately. Unlike the objective task, in the subjective one, participants conformed more with the human than the AI's responses. Overall, our findings show that under some circumstances, AI can influence people above and beyond the influence of other humans, offering new insights into social influence processes in the digital era.
人工智能(AI)技术在越来越多的领域(例如虚拟助手)的广泛应用增加了人类与 AI 日常互动的机会。但是,非人类代理是否可以影响人类,甚至有可能超越另一个人类的影响力呢?本研究调查了人们在面对不同任务(客观任务与主观任务)时,是否更容易受到另一个人类或 AI 提供的信息的影响。我们预计在客观任务中,AI(相对于其他人类)的影响力更大(即基于计数且只有一个可能的正确答案)。相比之下,我们预计在主观任务中,人类(相对于 AI)的影响力更大(基于将意义归因于唤起性图像)。在研究 1 中,参与者(N=156)完成了一系列客观任务的试验,需要对黑色背景上显示的白色点的数量进行数值估计。结果表明,参与者更倾向于遵循 AI 的回答,而不是人类的回答。在研究 2 中,参与者(N=102)在一系列主观任务中观察了与两个概念相关的唤起性图像,这些概念显然是由 AI 或人类提供的。然后,他们对每个概念适当地描述图像的程度进行了评价。与客观任务不同,在主观任务中,参与者更倾向于遵循人类的回答,而不是 AI 的回答。总的来说,我们的研究结果表明,在某些情况下,AI 可以超越其他人类对人的影响,为数字时代的社会影响过程提供了新的见解。